The legislation is really slow to catch up to these things, as it says in the article. It sounds like other alternative transports have been greenlit in recent years, and those also took time. I empathize with both sides. On the one hand, people have found a lower cost,highly efficient way to get around without a car - that’s a very good thing! On the other hand, people aren’t used to them being on the roads, they technically aren’t supposed to be yet, and they aren’t insurable just yet, there’s no agreed upon operating procedures for them to be on public roads, and it’s a matter of time before someone hits one and they argue they had no way of knowing to even look for that type of vehicle and they’re currently not wrong. Nobody wants that but it will happen.
Hopefully they can catch up to the times and get them okayed, but until then the tickets unfortunately make sense.
Delivery robots didn’t get approved overnight, they were being introduced and control tested as far back as 2015 in cities near me. Delivery robots also stand to make a profit for someone, so there was incentive to get them on measures and in front of legislation. Unless the unicycle manufacturers are petitioning to get them approved (unlikely since they make no money past the point of sale), it’s unlikely anyone has actually pushed them gotten them added to a measure and started the legislative review process.
Regardless though, I’m citing the article, which most people - you included id wager - didn’t actually read (which is totally fair, I don’t usually either but there weren’t comments yet!). So call bullshit on them!
Obviously, what the fella in the article did was illegal. The point I’m making is that it’s stupitt. With the challenges we face as a planet, impeding or penalizing anyone from getting around not in a traditional motor vehicle is ridiculous.
The legislation is really slow to catch up to these things, as it says in the article. It sounds like other alternative transports have been greenlit in recent years, and those also took time. I empathize with both sides. On the one hand, people have found a lower cost,highly efficient way to get around without a car - that’s a very good thing! On the other hand, people aren’t used to them being on the roads, they technically aren’t supposed to be yet, and they aren’t insurable just yet, there’s no agreed upon operating procedures for them to be on public roads, and it’s a matter of time before someone hits one and they argue they had no way of knowing to even look for that type of vehicle and they’re currently not wrong. Nobody wants that but it will happen.
Hopefully they can catch up to the times and get them okayed, but until then the tickets unfortunately make sense.
Legislation is slow to catch up? Delivery robots are approved. I’m calling BS.
Delivery robots didn’t get approved overnight, they were being introduced and control tested as far back as 2015 in cities near me. Delivery robots also stand to make a profit for someone, so there was incentive to get them on measures and in front of legislation. Unless the unicycle manufacturers are petitioning to get them approved (unlikely since they make no money past the point of sale), it’s unlikely anyone has actually pushed them gotten them added to a measure and started the legislative review process.
Regardless though, I’m citing the article, which most people - you included id wager - didn’t actually read (which is totally fair, I don’t usually either but there weren’t comments yet!). So call bullshit on them!
I’m calling BS on the system, my lemon.
Obviously, what the fella in the article did was illegal. The point I’m making is that it’s stupitt. With the challenges we face as a planet, impeding or penalizing anyone from getting around not in a traditional motor vehicle is ridiculous.